payitforward wrote:Uh huh. You've just fabricated a narrative out of whole cloth to explain Nicholson's poor play, and you want to call it "context." Sorry, that's not even vanilla, that's imaginary ice cream.
I'd call it average play but call it what you want to fluff your ego.
Iggy upped his 3 pt.% so it's reasonable to expect incremental improvement in that stat from Nicholson? If so, then it's reasonable to expect the same from Acy. Or anyone. Only... you have real data to support this claim? I'm guessing not. So, another fabricated narrative -- a story in which there's a happy ending.
So...no one has the potential to improve? With proper coaching and work ethic we cannot expect a player who would benefit from improving to work on his shot? This is a massive leap? I suppose the connection is hard to make for a special sort of person...
Better on/off numbers??? Give me a break.
Why cause it doesn't befit your agenda? Kick rocks.
A couple of terrible teams, for sure. Sacramento played in the Western Conference. Yet another fairy tale with a happy ending.
And Orl wasn't bad last year? Saying they played in the western conference which was top heavy doesn't really persuade me there.
I'm sorry, you're not telling me that defenses honed in on Nicholson are you? You're not really saying that, right?
I am, if you ever actually played defense, you aren't going to close out hard on a guy who doesn't shoot threes regularly. You have played/watched before correct?
As to offensive boards -- I agree, they are horrible. Avoid at all costs. I mean I don't understand why Drummond, Kanter, Jordan, Whiteside, Capela, Valanciunas, Faried, Davis, Thompson, Nurkic, and Adams have jobs in the league at all with the way they get all those offensive rebounds.
Where did I say AVOID Offensive rebounds at all cost in the original post. Seriously leave your hyperbolic bull **** at the door. You want to be a jerkoff fine, but lets not be facetious douche bags and misconstrue what was said just cause it doesn't correlate with which stats YOU think represent winning basketball best.
Nicholson has had 4 years in the league to prove what he brings to the table. He was on a team where there was PT if he'd showed something. He didn't. Could all that change? Sure, anything can happen. In fact, I hear the ice cream truck right now, coming down my street ringing his bell.
He did definitely have ups and downs for sure, not denying that but the coaching changes they went through and minimal talent surely didn't foster an environment for him to thrive. Then again not like we have much more talent then ORL either. Anything can happen for sure. You could actually not have an aneurysm when an average player gets an average contract. But nah... that would be too vanilla a reaction for you...
Thing is, he's a bad player. Quincy Acy is a better player than Andrew Nicholson. Period.
nah, he is average with the off chance of becoming good in a decently defined role. And Acy isn't a bad player. I just won't throw a hissy fit on this one that we got one over the other. But hey, to each their own.
